WELCOME TO THE NEW YORK STATE
WIDE CENTRAL REGISTER OF CHILD
ABUSE AND MALTREATMENT CLASS
ACTION WEBSITE

This website has been established to explain
the status of two separate class action lawsuits against the New
York State Office of Children and Family Services (“OCFS”) which
operates the New York Statewide Abuse and Maltreatment Register
(“SCR” or the “Register”). The court has certified two classes. One
class is referred to as the Finch Class and the other is referred to
as Sub Class B. This website will advise you of a settlement for
Finch Class A and for Sub Class B and the rights that members of the
class have.

New York, similarly to virtually every State in the union, maintains
a Registry that lists the names of people who have supposedly abused
or maltreated a child. Inclusion on the Registry is virtually
automatic requiring only that the allegations satisfy a minimal “any
credible evidence” standard. Although adding a name to the Registry
is easily done the consequence of such inclusion can be economically
devastating.
Before an employer who is engaged in child care may hire, the law
requires that an inquiry be made to ascertain if the job applicant
is listed on the Registry. Licensing or foster care agencies must
also consult the Registry. If the person is not listed, the employer
receives a “no hit” letter. If listed, a “hit letter” is sent to the
employer which will for all practical purposes foreclose the
opportunity to be gainfully employed in the child care industry.
Once on the Registry, your name remains listed for up to 28 years.
In 1994, a federal Appeal court held that the legal requirement that
employers must consult the Registry is an unconstitutional
impediment to employment.

Finch v. State, filed in February of 2004, challenged the
substantial delays in
scheduling these hearings. Since hearings took years to complete,
many people who were awaiting a clearance lost job opportunities.
These delays were particularly troubling since 60%-70% of people who
eventually received their hearings were exonerated.
The Honorable Shira Scheindlin of the Southern District of New York
(04 CIV 1668), was assigned to the Finch case. The Judge certified a
class. After denying the State’s motions to dismiss and for summary
judgment the trial was scheduled to begin in March of 2010.
Three weeks before the trial was to start the case took a dramatic
turn. A staff worker at the Central Registry advised counsel that
shortly after the Finch litigation was filed the State Agency that
operates the Registry undertook various projects that wrongfully
terminated hearing requests. To eliminate the hearing backlogs of up
to seven years the State implemented a project that contacted the
inquiring employer to ascertain if they were still interested in the
applicant. As these calls took place years after the clearance
request had been made all of the contacted employers were no longer
interested in the applicant. The request for a hearing was then
closed out and the State records were marked that the hearing had
been “waived”. Some hearing requests were shredded and similarly
noted as “waived.” As the State records recorded that the requested
hearing was waived, the person who was listed was permanently
foreclosed from receiving a hearing ever again when a later
clearance inquiry was made. These projects violated the statute that
created the Registry which afforded the right to the hearing to the
job applicant and not to the inquiring employer. After discovery
confirmed the “whistle blowers” allegations, the State agreed to
settle the “project” claims. Beginning in August 2010, and staggered
over fifteen months, notices would be sent to 20,000 people whose
hearings were terminated by these projects. People who receive these
Notice Letters are all members of Sub Class B. The notice advises
the class members of their right to reopen their “waived” hearings.
Because of this settlement over a thousand New Yorkers have
requested that their hearings be reopened.

Finch Class A

As the partial settlement only related to the hearing termination
projects, the question as to how long it should take to complete
hearings remained outstanding. The timeliness trial was then
scheduled to start in September 2010. On the eve of trial a final
settlement of the litigation was reached. Beginning in November,
2011, for those whose opportunity to work is impeded, hearings will
be completed in four months. For those whose jobs are not
immediately at risk, hearings will be completed in eight months.
Compliance with these time limits will be monitored by appointed
class counsel for up to three years.
For thousands of people hearings will now be held in a timely way
allowing many to return to work sooner. Those projects that
wrongfully deprived people of their rights to a hearing are now a
thing of the past.

On December 18, 2008, Judge Scheindlin did so and defined the
members of the Finch Class as:
“All persons who are working or desire to work or to be licensed in
child-related employment who, now and in the future, are listed on
the Statewide Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment as
the subjects of indicated reports that were investigated and
indicated by a designated investigative agency, and who have timely
requested amendment of the indicated report and whose requests for
amendment have not been disposed of.”

(See 12/18/2008 Decision link)

Thus, if you are currently listed on the Statewide Register and have
requested a hearing and have yet to receive the hearing, you are a
member of this Finch Class A.

Beginning November 1, 2011, if you have applied for a job or a
license to work with children and are awaiting a clearance from the
Register, your review will be completed in 130 (4 months) days from
the day you make your request. If you have been terminated or
suspended form a job because of the indicated report, your review
will also be completed in 130 days from the date of request. Those
whose jobs, or license or job application are not immediately
affected will have reviews completed within 310 days (8 months).

In the past people who have requested hearings have had to await
months and often years before the hearings were completed. While
awaiting completion of the hearing people were unable to work in
child-related employment or to receive a license to operate a day
care center or to become a foster parent. The settlement will
require these hearings be completed more quickly.

On February 7, 2011 Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin, Federal Judge in the
Southern District of New York, has approved the final settlement. No
one has objected to the terms of the settlement. CLICK HERE to view
class settlement.

A. Under the agreement, because of fiscal considerations, the State
will not have to comply with time limits until November 2011.
B. After November 2011, Class counsel will randomly review records
to make sure that 85% of requests will be completed within the
agreed to time limits.
C. The Court will continue to have jurisdiction to make sure that
the State is complying with the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
D. Oversight by Class Counsel will be for up to three years after
the settlement is approved by the Judge. If the State can show that
it has completed reviews in a timely fashion for 85% of requests for
six consecutive quarters, then the oversight may end after two
years.

A. Who are the Class Representatives?
The plaintiffs Barbara Finch, Carol Jordan and Barbara Ortiz will be
acting as the class representatives.
B. Who are the Attorneys Representing the Class?
The attorney designated by the court as counsel for the Class is: